Am Dienstag, den 28.07.2020, 18:53 +0200 schrieb Tobias Geerinckx-Rice: > Leo Prikler 写道： > > I'll use inferiors as a local workaround for the time being and > > wait > > for the problem to be fixed upstream. I'll also look into 5.9 > > to 5.11 > > and perhaps provide a proper downgrade patch later on. > > I admit to being a bit confused. IIRC on #guix you reported that > wine-staging was broken, not wine64-staging. If you only want to > downgrade the latter, that's all right by me, but I consider that > one of the risks of using the staging branch to begin with. > > Is there a reason you rely on staging, and the 64-bit version to > boot? > > Kind regards, > > T G-R I'm referring to the package "wine64-staging", which is on master. I may have been confused myself at the time I mentioned this in #guix, but now I have tested this a bit more thoroughly.
For one, I've historically been using wine64, since (at least on Guix) it works with both 32bit and 64bit software and I sometimes stumble upon the latter. As a result, I have a 64bit wine prefix and using wine (or wine-staging) does not really work well with that. I was able to determine that plain wine is unaffected by running the same commands on a machine with no existing prefix. (Note, that regular wine64 still fails with a fresh prefix.) My experiments with wine64-staging were solely meant as a way of finding the point at which wine64 fails, I have no intent of actually using it for more than that. I'm not quite sure, what exactly is at fault here. It could be upstream, or it could be the magic that we use to merge 32 and 64 bit wine. TL;DR: The affected packages are wine64 and wine64-staging, the latter of which is broken beyond 5.8 (though 5.9 would work as well). Since this affects the 64bit version of wine specifically, we either have to fix something in our build (not sure what) or desync wine and wine64 (same with -staging variants) Regards, Leo
